RUWAIDAH M.
Nearly five years after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the Chagos Islands rightfully belong to Mauritius, the United Kingdom has begun the process of transferring sovereignty over the 60-island archipelago. While this marks a historic victory for Mauritius, it does little to address the long-standing struggles of the displaced Chagossian community.
As Mauritius moved towards independence in 1968, it was pressured into relinquishing the Chagos Islands, which remained under British control. Shortly after, the UK leased the archipelago to the United States for the construction of a military base on Diego Garcia. This led to the forced removal of over 1,500 native Chagossians, who were exiled to Mauritius and other nearby countries, stripped of their homeland and livelihoods. In many ways, Mauritius, too, was a victim of colonial manoeuvring, having been coerced into a decision that undermined its territorial integrity even before it had fully gained independence.
Mauritius consistently challenged the UK’s claim over the Chagos Archipelago, arguing that its detachment violated UN Resolution 1514, which prohibits the breakup of colonies before independence. Over the years, Mauritius pursued a strategic diplomatic approach—investing in top British legal experts, securing African Union backing, and rallying support from key international allies. This effort culminated in a decisive victory at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2019, where judges ruled 13 to 1 in favor of Mauritius. Subsequent UN votes reinforced the ruling, increasing pressure on the UK, which eventually agreed to begin the handover process in 2024.
Chagossian activists have long been at the forefront of the struggle for justice, advocating for their right to return to their homeland. Among them, Liseby Elyse, a Chagossian woman forcibly displaced as a teenager, endured severe hardship, poverty, and discrimination—an experience shared by many in her community. She became a leading voice in the fight for justice, advocating for their right to return. In 2018, she delivered an emotional testimony before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), describing how Chagossians were expelled « like animals, » forced into destitution in Mauritius, and left to mourn loved ones lost to poor living conditions.
Since the UK announced the transfer of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius in late 2024, Chagossians have voiced mixed emotions—caught between hope and disappointment. While the shift in sovereignty is a long-overdue recognition of historical injustice, it does little to address the Chagossians’ fundamental demand: the right to return to their homeland.
One of the biggest obstacles remains the U.S. military base on Diego Garcia, which operates under a 99-year lease. This agreement, made without Chagossian consultation, raises serious concerns about whether resettlement will ever be possible. Olivier Bancoult, leader of the Chagos Refugees Group, has been a tireless advocate for Chagossian rights and has expressed frustration over their continued exclusion. In October 2024, he reaffirmed the need for justice, stating, « There is a need to correct the injustice inflicted on the Chagossian population. »
While acknowledging the diplomatic significance of the handover, he also highlighted the deep pain of displacement, remarking, « This has been a long struggle lasting more than 40 years, and many of our people have passed away. But today is a sign of recognition of the injustice done against Chagossians who were forced to leave their homes. » Despite being central to this decades-long struggle, Chagossians’ voices have not been adequately prioritised in negotiations between Mauritius, the UK, and the U.S.
Under the new agreement, Mauritius has the legal right to resettle the Chagos Islands, except for Diego Garcia, which remains under U.S. military control. However, the remaining islands have been uninhabited for decades, lacking essential infrastructure, services, and economic opportunities. Without significant investment in development, resettlement would be unsustainable for returning Chagossians. While Mauritius has won the legal battle, it now faces the moral obligation to ensure that its victory translates into tangible benefits for those most affected.
While the UK has begun distributing aid packages to support the descendants of the displaced 1,500 Chagossians, questions remain about Mauritius’ role in this process. Will it commit to funding resettlement efforts, or was the sovereignty battle primarily driven by political and economic interests? It remains to be seen whether Mauritius will actively champion the Chagossians’ right to return or if the islands will remain symbolic rather than functional.
With sovereignty over the Chagos Islands now in Mauritius’ hands, the next critical question is: What comes next? Will the government prioritise resettlement and invest in infrastructure to support returning Chagossians, or will economic and tourism opportunities take precedence? Given the financial and logistical challenges, it remains unclear whether resettlement will be a genuine commitment or a symbolic gesture.
Internationally, there has been limited pressure to ensure the Chagossians’ return. While the UK has provided financial aid packages, there is no clear framework to support long-term reintegration. The U.S. lease of Diego Garcia further complicates the situation, as it restricts access to the largest and most developed island in the archipelago. The role of both the UK and the US in supporting resettlement remains an open question.
For the Chagossians, the demands remain unchanged—they seek the right to return, financial reparations, and recognition of the injustices they have endured. Many fear that despite Mauritius’ diplomatic victory, their fate will continue to be dictated by political interests rather than a genuine effort to restore their homeland and dignity. However, the opportunity remains for Mauritius to prove that its commitment extends beyond sovereignty and towards real justice for the Chagossian people.